ping?
On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 10:00, Christophe Lyon <christophe.l...@linaro.org> wrote: > > On Wed, 13 Nov 2019 at 15:46, Christophe Lyon > <christophe.l...@linaro.org> wrote: > > > > On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 at 12:13, Richard Earnshaw (lists) > > <richard.earns...@arm.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 18/10/2019 14:18, Christophe Lyon wrote: > > > > + bool not_supported = arm_arch_notm || flag_pic || TARGET_NEON; > > > > > > > > > > This is a poor name in the context of the function as a whole. What's > > > not supported. Please think of a better name so that I have some idea > > > what the intention is. > > > > That's to keep most of the code common when checking if -mpure-code > > and -mslow-flash-data are supported. > > These 3 cases are common to the two compilation flags, and > > -mslow-flash-data still needs to check TARGET_HAVE_MOVT in addition. > > > > Would "common_unsupported_modes" work better for you? > > Or I can duplicate the "arm_arch_notm || flag_pic || TARGET_NEON" in > > the two tests. > > > > Hi, > > Here is an updated version, using "common_unsupported_modes" instead > of "not_supported", and fixing the typo reported by Kyrill. > The ChangeLog is still the same. > > OK? > > Thanks, > > Christophe > > > Thanks, > > > > Christophe > > > > > > > > R.
